|
Originally Posted by flycrj200
(Post 690057)
I would not worry about that, IMHO Mesa will continue to fly for Delta and United.
#1 Mesa's stock is doing very badly, nothing from the company about that. #2 Does Mesa have enough cash to even come out of BK? Speculations are that they do not and are milking time hoping for a miracle. That is why all the silence from PHX. It would be a very tough BK to come out of. |
Originally Posted by minimwage4
(Post 690100)
How do you figure? About the only way Mesa could continue flying for UA is if they underbid putting them further in the hole for the sake of making things look on the up and up. Forget about Delta, unless if it's for free.
#1 Mesa's stock is doing very badly, nothing from the company about that. #2 Does Mesa have enough cash to even come out of BK? Speculations are that they do not and are milking time hoping for a miracle. That is why all the silence from PHX. It would be a very tough BK to come out of. |
Originally Posted by FlyASA
(Post 690137)
Not only does the company have a bad reputation but the second they enter BK Delta will for sure dump them (US could possibly dump them too). With out significant feeder contracts no one will see them as viable. I'm not sure they could even get capital to finance an exit chapter 11. The credit market is still very tight and Mesa has had a lot of negative press recently (Delta court battle, Aloha, etc.), I'm just not sure JO could sell the prospect of his company to anyone.
OJ's only chance would be to re-negotiate one of his feeds in advance (UA or US), downsize the company by 70% to match the new contract, and attract some financing for his rationalized operation.. Since a BK filing would almost certainly allow all major partners to dump mesa immediately, he would lose DL for sure, probably one other, and quite possibly all three. It would be too tempting an opportunity for the majors to dump excess capacity without expensive lawsuits. I'm guessing he might be able to keep one, because BK might allow him to reduce lease and labor contracts and make a really lowball offer to somebody (MAG pilots, say buh-bye to your recent contract "gains") I think it will all hinge on the 900's...they are the only thing of value he controls, and they might serve as the basis for a new ultra-cheap, large RJ contract (I'm sure UA-ALPA will roll over on the scope if offered some enticement). But it's a dangerous game...since 900's have street value, if he cuts too close to the bone on those leases the lien-holders might just take their toys and go home. |
One thing Mesa has going for it is the PHX operation for US Airways. Since PHX is a big hub for Airways, and since no other regional partner for Airways operates out of PHX right now, I think Airways would have to keep sending flying to Mesa even during a bankruptcy. It would take time for any regional partner to ramp up an operation in PHX to offset the loss of Mesa. RAH doesn't have extra aircraft. TSA and CHQ are very small operations for Airways. Skywest could do it, but not at the drop of a hat. Express jet maybe, but not if they find flying with United or Delta first. I could see PSA actually benefiting from Mesa being cut, and opening up operations in PHX. Or PSA taking over more CLT flying and having RAH head west. Either way, I think PSA stands to gain the most overall.
|
Mesa has exclusive rights to PHX for Airways, I don't know when that expires though. Soonish, I think.
|
Where did that come from?
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 690265)
In the current regional feed and credit markets, a ch.11 filing could be catastrophic, and lead very rapidly to ch.7.
OJ's only chance would be to re-negotiate one of his feeds in advance (UA or US), downsize the company by 70% to match the new contract, and attract some financing for his rationalized operation.. Since a BK filing would almost certainly allow all major partners to dump mesa immediately, he would lose DL for sure, probably one other, and quite possibly all three. It would be too tempting an opportunity for the majors to dump excess capacity without expensive lawsuits. I'm guessing he might be able to keep one, because BK might allow him to reduce lease and labor contracts and make a really lowball offer to somebody (MAG pilots, say buh-bye to your recent contract "gains") I think it will all hinge on the 900's...they are the only thing of value he controls, and they might serve as the basis for a new ultra-cheap, large RJ contract (I'm sure UA-ALPA will roll over on the scope if offered some enticement). But it's a dangerous game...since 900's have street value, if he cuts too close to the bone on those leases the lien-holders might just take their toys and go home. If you were betting on that statement, you would certainly lose. The pilots at UA lost control of the 50/70 pax jets during the bankruptcy. That gun is no longer pointed at our head. The pilot group is not in total agreement about all of the issues, and our unity is not where it should be at this stage of the game. However, the one thing that an overwhelming majority of UA pilots do agree on is scope and the 90 pax small jet flying. (I'll leave room for the 777 and 400 captains who are unaware of the issues.) The NC has been given direction from the MEC. 90 seat jets will not be in any agreement unless they are mainline aircraft. If you want to play the never-say-never game, I would agree that every pilot has their price. In this case, the "enticement" would be a significant price that the company would never be willing to pay, particularly since we all know that allowing UAX to fly anything larger than 70 pax means a significant reduction if not the complete loss of our airbus fleet. The only scenario that I see that would include UAX flying 90 pax is a second bankruptcy. All bets are off then. This looks more like flame-bait, than your usual level-headed industry observations. Hog |
Originally Posted by Groundhog
(Post 690308)
OK. I'll bite.
If you were betting on that statement, you would certainly lose. The pilots at UA lost control of the 50/70 pax jets during the bankruptcy. That gun is no longer pointed at our head. The pilot group is not in total agreement about all of the issues, and our unity is not where it should be at this stage of the game. However, the one thing that an overwhelming majority of UA pilots do agree on is scope and the 90 pax small jet flying. (I'll leave room for the 777 and 400 captains who are unaware of the issues.) The NC has been given direction from the MEC. 90 seat jets will not be in any agreement unless they are mainline aircraft. If you want to play the never-say-never game, I would agree that every pilot has their price. In this case, the "enticement" would be a significant price that the company would never be willing to pay, particularly since we all know that allowing UAX to fly anything larger than 70 pax means a significant reduction if not the complete loss of our airbus fleet. The only scenario that I see that would include UAX flying 90 pax is a second bankruptcy. All bets are off then. This looks more like flame-bait, than your usual level-headed industry observations. Hog 70% of Rickair’s posts on Mesa are hatred driven assumptions with no solid facts. I wouldn’t read to deeply into it. Your post on UAL MEC allowing 90 seat flying at the regional level is right on. |
Originally Posted by Groundhog
(Post 690308)
OK. I'll bite.
If you were betting on that statement, you would certainly lose. The pilots at UA lost control of the 50/70 pax jets during the bankruptcy. That gun is no longer pointed at our head. The pilot group is not in total agreement about all of the issues, and our unity is not where it should be at this stage of the game. However, the one thing that an overwhelming majority of UA pilots do agree on is scope and the 90 pax small jet flying. (I'll leave room for the 777 and 400 captains who are unaware of the issues.) The NC has been given direction from the MEC. 90 seat jets will not be in any agreement unless they are mainline aircraft. If you want to play the never-say-never game, I would agree that every pilot has their price. In this case, the "enticement" would be a significant price that the company would never be willing to pay, particularly since we all know that allowing UAX to fly anything larger than 70 pax means a significant reduction if not the complete loss of our airbus fleet. The only scenario that I see that would include UAX flying 90 pax is a second bankruptcy. All bets are off then. This looks more like flame-bait, than your usual level-headed industry observations. Hog |
Originally Posted by StrikeTime
(Post 690319)
Groundhog,
70% of Rickair’s posts on Mesa are hatred driven assumptions with no solid facts. I wouldn’t read to deeply into it. Your post on UAL MEC allowing 90 seat flying at the regional level is right on. Hatred is the wrong word, but that company (and probably one or two others) is the poster child for what's wrong with the airline industry...and the more light shed on their practices, the better. Since I have personal experience there, I'm more inclined to talk about mesa than say colgan. I really don't want dis people who work there, no point in that, but I will attempt to educate those who are under OJs spell and like to rationalize how they are treated, as well as anyone who might consider working there if they are hiring. I'm sure OJ would like me to shut up just as much as you would. |
Originally Posted by Rightseat Ballast
(Post 690291)
It would take time for any regional partner to ramp up an operation in PHX to offset the loss of Mesa
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 690325)
I really don't want dis people who work there, no point in that, but I will attempt to educate those who are under OJs spell and like to rationalize how they are treated, as well as anyone who might consider working there if they are hiring.
I'm sure OJ would like me to shut up just as much as you would. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:30 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands